Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

White House Declares War on Impeachment Inquiry and Constitution; Yom Kippur Shooting Rampage Kills One at Synagogue in Germany; Sources: Trump Asked Administration Officials to Work with Giuliani; Ex-Congressman Trey Gowdy Expected to Help White House Impeachment Fight. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired October 09, 2019 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[09:00:20]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Top of the hour. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Jim Sciutto. We're following breaking news this morning.

Officials in a German town calling it a rampage after two people are shot dead -- and this is key -- near a synagogue on the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur. We're following the latest details on that. We will bring you those as they come.

HARLOW: Before that, the White House lays down the gauntlet, setting up a constitutional battle not seen in generations. In a scorching, often surreal letter to House Democrats, the White House declares all- out war on the impeachment inquiry into President Trump vowing zero cooperation, claiming Democrats want to just overturn the results of the 2016 election.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, though, undeterred, firing back in her own letter that the impeachment inquiry will continue and that the president of the United States, in her words, is, quote, "not above the law."

SCIUTTO: It's a constitutional crisis in the making. And crazy and frightening. That is how a White House official described the phone call between President Trump and the president of Ukraine. According to a memo written by the first whistleblower, the official was left, quote, "shaken" after listening in on that call, a call in which President Trump, you'll remember, pushed to have a political rival, Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, investigated by a foreign power, holding leverage over that foreign power.

For more on this historic fight over the balance of power in Washington, let's begin with CNN's Joe Johns. He's at the White House.

Joe, the White House is making it clear here that they will fight this impeachment inquiry as they have fought other examples of congressional oversight by basically saying we're not going to cooperate. JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: That's what the White

House is saying so far. And, you know, they sent that letter up to Capitol Hill which essentially makes procedural complaints, not substantive. But procedural complaints about the way the inquiry is going. And they were pressed, though, on a call last night, a conference call with reporter as to whether the White House would cooperate with the House of Representatives inquiry if there were a full vote, which is one of the things they say hasn't happened.

And that senior administration official would not commit to actually participating in the inquiry and letting witnesses testify and so on even if there were a vote. So we're sort of in a holding pattern on this thing right now. And I just want to read you a quote from that letter from just last night that really goes to show just how far down the road the White House already is on this.

"President Trump and his administration reject your baseless unconstitutional efforts to overturn the democratic process. Your unprecedented actions have left the president with no choice in order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, executive branch and all future occupants of the Office of the presidency. The president and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances."

So there are some legal arguments in this letter, but this is basically a political letter to the House of Representatives telling them, no deal. We're not going to cooperate. Back to you.

SCIUTTO: Joe Johns, that has enormous consequences. Thanks very much.

There are now strategic decisions for House Democrats to make. What to do next in this face-off with the president when he is not cooperating with the inquiry?

CNN congressional correspondent Lauren Fox. She is live on Capitol Hill.

So, Lauren, do Democrats have a plan here? It's not clear -- we've been asking Democrats. It's not clear that they've expressed one or articulated one.

LAUREN FOX, CNN POLITICS CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Nancy Pelosi is basically arguing she doesn't have to hold a vote to open this impeachment inquiry. Instead she says it's not in the Constitution. It's not in the House rules. Therefore, if she wants to have a vote, she'll have one. If she doesn't, she won't. So that's the standing right now of Democratic leaders.

What they are arguing basically is the president has been obstructing their investigations for the last eight months. This is not new. This impeachment inquiry, you know, raises the stakes of what they're trying to do here. But this is not new.

And in a letter last night, Nancy Pelosi fired back basically saying the White House should be warned that continued efforts to hide the truth of the president's abuse of power from the American people will be regarded as further evidence of obstruction.

Now just a reminder, the paths forward here are far and few between. One of the things to remember is that if you want to go to court to enforce subpoenas, that takes time. So, they may just go forward arguing that if the president and the White House does not want to comply, does not want to play ball, then that's on them.

[09:05:06]

This is basically giving them an opportunity to get their truth out there. If they don't want to participate in these depositions or these document requests, that's for them to decide -- Jim and Poppy.

HARLOW: Lauren Fox, great reporting. Thank you so much.

Let's talk about all of this this morning and there is a lot. David Swerdlick, assistant editor for the "Washington Post" is here, Molly Ball, national correspondent for "TIME" and Elliot Williams, former federal prosecutor.

Good morning, one and all.

Elliot, you have a lot of experience on this side working with congressional committees on this type of stuff. You say about this White House letter, quote, "Everything is wrong about this letter." Why?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Right. Well, again, they don't make or attempt to make a legal or really constitutional argument. What they do is really attack process here. So where they could have said, you know, you can't establish that the president committed an impeachable offense, or where they could have said, regardless of what you think of the president's conduct, he's the president of the United States, and under Article 2 of the Constitution, he's allowed to engage in foreign --

HARLOW: Right.

WILLIAMS: They don't do any of that. They make up a lot of arguments out of thin air including, and I've got one right here, they say that impeachment should only be used to, quote, "defend our system of government or our constitutional liberties against a dire threat." That's just not accurate. That's not in the Constitution and they are making this stuff up to sort of craft these political arguments.

Another thing that's troubling really quickly is this idea -- and they talk about it a few times in the letter, the president talks about it, too -- of using impeachment to, quote, "overturn" the results of an election and to try to skew 2020. If that's the case, you're never, ever again going to be able to impeach a president of the United States because they're always --

HARLOW: It's a good point.

WILLIAMS: -- just off of an election or going --

HARLOW: Sure.

WILLIAMS: You know, sometimes going into a new one. So they're really just making stuff up.

SCIUTTO: Molly, what's not clear to me, though, is what the strategy is for Democrats to respond to this if -- and it looks like this is going to be the case, if the White House continues to stonewall here. I asked a member of the Judiciary Committee yesterday this very question. Listen to his answer and I want to get your response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Sounds like Democrats are still trying to develop a strategy.

REP. STEVE COHEN (D-TN): Well, I think we are, and I think the judiciary had the same problem. We were stonewalled. People refused to comply with subpoenas. We've gone to court on contempt citations. But the courts are still ruling and/or they've been appealed. But I think all of this does show obstruction of Congress and that can be a charge in itself.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: All right. So they can get evidence of obstruction charge to Congress but if they can't explore the central issue here, because the White House stonewalls on witnesses, documents, text messages, e- mails, et cetera, what do they do? What are the options?

MOLLY BALL, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think you see them doing what they have been doing, which is continue to ask for things and then not get them and continue to try to make the case in the court of public opinion that what the administration is doing is itself an abuse of power, is itself grounds for impeachment. And then continue to wait on these court processes which, as Elliot was saying, can be lengthy.

But they don't really have any other choice. I mean, in the system, there's only one way to enforce the law and that's to proceed through the process of law enforcement and the judiciary and that can take time. Does it eventually come to a head? Is there eventually a final verdict whether it's the Supreme Court or anything else?

You also have some Democratic members of Congress talking about the inherent contempt power which has almost never been used but saying is there some other way that we can hold people accountable if they won't comply with these requests? Can we put them in jail? Can we fine them? And so there's a lot of options being explored.

This is all unchartered territory because so much of it is unprecedented because the administration is responding in these very extreme ways which even previous presidents who faced impeachment have not gone to quite these lengths. HARLOW: OK. So, on -- David, to Molly's point about the court of

public opinion, there is a really interesting piece in the "Journal" this morning, the "Wall Street Journal." It's from the editorial board. Here it is. The headline is "Impeachment in Secret." Let me just read you the first few lines here. "Democrats are moving fast towards what looks like an inevitable vote to impeach the president. Why are they doing more to persuade Americans who don't already agree with them? They will not convince anyone else with their current method of irregular order, secret hearings and selective leaks to the pro-impeachment press."

They go on to say, for example, the whistleblower. This is someone who should testify in public. Obviously, there are security concerns about that. But I wonder if you find any salience in the argument that if you're going to sway people that aren't swayed yet, you can't have much of it done in private.

DAVID SWERDLICK, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, good morning, Poppy. So it seems like the "Wall Street Journal" editorial board is running a little interference there for the White House. But I don't think their argument is going to work that well for this reason. The key facts in this case, in this episode, are already out there. The White House released a partial transcript of the call with President Zelensky. The whistleblower complaint is already out there. Some of the text messages.

[09:10:04]

I realize Republicans want more of the text messages. Some of the text messages between some of the key players are out there. So the public can make up its minds about the basic sort of text of what's at issue here without being present for all of these hearings and without hearing from all of the witnesses. Yes, the Democrats have a responsibility to investigate this thoroughly and to be as transparent as possible. But this isn't a situation where people don't know what's basically at issue here.

They know that the president said, I need you to do me a favor, though. So, Democrats will make up their minds. Republicans will make up their minds, and the public will make up their minds primarily on those facts. And some of these issues related to that op-ed and also in the White House counsel's letter I think are a lot about process which we know from the Mueller report hasn't resonated as much with the public.

SCIUTTO: Timeline, Molly Ball. Because Nancy Pelosi posited a pretty aggressive timeline for getting through and finishing this impeachment inquiry. You heard initial talk, by Thanksgiving. If the White House is stonewalling on each of these things and wants to take it to court, we know if it goes to court, it can take much longer than that. Has that Democratic timeline effectively been blown up here?

BALL: I don't think we know yet. I think it was from the beginning a very ambitious timeline to say the least. Congress doesn't -- isn't known for moving fast on anything. And particular, as you said, there are so many obstacles to this process being created for the White House itself. You know, I think that Democrats are also sending a message to the White House that it's up to them whether they want to draw out this process which so far looks like it is politically damaging for the White House.

It looks like despite, you know, the argument that the "Journal" is making, actually we have poll after poll after poll showing that support for impeachment among the public has risen quite sharply. So, people are apparently being persuaded that there is something here. This process so far, which has been happening while Congress has been out of session. I think that's another important thing to mention. Congress comes back into session next week. There will be more open hearings when Congress is in session. There will conceivably also be more chaos and circus and things that are confusing to digest.

But this -- so far, this process has unfolded almost completely in a situation where there's just a skeleton crew of committee members here in Washington and most of Congress doesn't come back until next week.

SCIUTTO: It will be harder for lawmakers of both parties to hide from making comments on this.

HARLOW: Sure.

SCIUTTO: When they're walking around the halls.

HARLOW: There you go.

SCIUTTO: David Swerdlick, Molly Ball, Elliot Williams, thanks to all of you.

SWERDLICK: Thanks.

BALL: Thank you.

HARLOW: And of course, we are following this breaking news this morning out of Germany. At least two people have been killed after a shooting near a synagogue. The city is calling the attack a rampage.

SCIUTTO: Police in the area tweeted that one person has now been arrested. Of course this is happening during the Jewish high holiday of Yom Kippur.

Our Nic Robertson, he's been following the story here.

Nic, this appears to be a brazen and deadly attack.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: It is. A rampage, that's how the city is describing it. And we're now able to take a look at that video of what appears to be the gunman and I say it appears to be the gunman in this case because several eyewitnesses that we've heard from now have identified the clothing and the helmet they say that he was wearing. And we can see it here. We can see this camouflage-type green jacket. A metal helmet. Here he's firing a weapon.

One witness said he thought he was holding an automatic weapon but when you see the weapon fire here a lot of smoke comes from it. It looks more like perhaps some kind of hunting rifle. But what eyewitnesses are telling us, and we've heard now about two separate incidents close to each other. One, the attacker seen throwing hand grenades over the wall of a synagogue while he had the automatic -- well, he had the weapon in his hand, and the witness to that said that he could see a person lying in the ground near the attacker.

And this was a very high wall at the synagogue, about 2 1/2 meters, about eight feet high. It had electronic gates on the synagogue there. And the other person that was killed was killed at a nearby kebab store. People in there buying their lunch. And the witnesses to that describe a horrific situation where they're inside the store. The gunman tosses in a homemade grenade. It lands at the feet of an old lady. It doesn't explode so the gunman raises his weapon and shoots in through the window of the store.

Now we understand one person was killed there. One of the eyewitnesses literally fled and hid in the toilet there until the police came and freed him. The police are saying that they have taken a suspect into custody. That there are other people who are injured. But we've heard from the government spokesman saying that they hope, and this is coming from the government spokesman, that they hope at this stage that the security services can apprehend the suspect or suspects in this case.

[09:15:00]

And they advise people to take caution in the area. So, at the moment, it appears that this may still be an ongoing situation.

SCIUTTO: Goodness, I mean, to see that in broad daylight on the streets of a German town --

HARLOW: Yes --

SCIUTTO: Firing those weapons is just remarkable.

HARLOW: Nic Robertson, we so appreciate your reporting. Please update us. Thank you very much.

SCIUTTO: And we will stay on top of that story. Still to come at this hour, reporting first on CNN. President Trump told Energy Secretary Rick Perry as early as May of this year to talk to Giuliani, his personal lawyer, about Ukraine. We're going to speak to the former director of National Intelligence James Clapper about that and other issues, next.

Plus, the White House hoping that former Congressman Trey Gowdy can help in the impeachment fight? Will it work? A lawyer who represented four governors facing impeachment proceedings will join us to discuss.

HARLOW: And Senator Lindsey Graham in a remarkable interview says the president's decision to pull U.S. troops out of northern Syria is, quote, "putting his presidency at risk." We are live on the border of Turkey and Syria covering this in a way that only CNN can. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:20:00]

HARLOW: All right, new this morning. Two sources tell CNN that President Trump directed his Energy Secretary Rick Perry and two top State Department officials to circumvent official channels and to have his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani deal with the potential meeting with the Ukrainian president.

Now, one source says the president believed that Ukraine was still rampantly corrupt and said if Ukrainian President Zelensky wanted to meet with him, he would have to convince Rudy Giuliani first. The president's push to have Giuliani as the gatekeeper essentially here demonstrate how significant a role Giuliani has been playing in brokering access to the president, specifically regarding Ukraine policy and passing messages to other administration officials.

SCIUTTO: Joining me now to discuss, James Clapper; he's former director of National Intelligence, he's also a CNN national security analyst. General Clapper, thank you for joining us this morning.

JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: So you worked for nearly 50 years in government and in Intelligence. Tell us the significance of a sitting president using his personal lawyer to broker decisions, key decisions with what is a key national security partner of the U.S.

CLAPPER: Well, this is yet another example, Jim, of the unconventional, unorthodox, unprecedented processes that this administration uses in conducting business. And throughout this Ukraine saga, you know, just what the role of Rudy Giuliani has been has not been real clear, whether he was acting as the president's attorney or acting on his own.

And of course, this had to really complicate life for the State Department, particularly the career foreign service officers who were involved or had some role in the Ukraine portfolio. So, this is just another example of this as I say unorthodox approach.

SCIUTTO: I want to ask about consequences here. This is just a basic question. You spent 2016 as director of National Intelligence, identifying or seeking to push back against foreign interference in U.S. presidential election. As you look at what President Trump did here, is his pressure on Ukraine, his outreach, his use of leverage on Ukraine to get them to investigate Joe Biden.

In the simplest terms, is that a U.S. president participating in foreign interference or at least encouraging foreign interference in the upcoming U.S. election?

CLAPPER: You know, exactly, Jim. You know, you think after all the trauma of the 2016 election and the profound, deep Russian systemic and widespread, I think was -- to paraphrase the Mueller report, interference in our election process in 2016, you know, you think there would be a lesson there.

And here is the president himself who really never bought into that thesis, I guess. Didn't -- he was a nonbeliever in the Russian interference, even though the evidence for it is quite overwhelming and has been verified multiple times most recently by the way by the Senate Intelligence Committee.

SCIUTTO: Yes --

CLAPPER: So, the fact that he would actively solicit foreign countries' involvement in our election is just appalling and incredible.

SCIUTTO: We know that Russia will try again in 2020. That's the assessment of U.S. Intelligence agencies. Since President Trump never talks about election security as a priority. In fact, he's resisted, according to his own cabinet officials discussing that or having cabinet level meetings on it. I just wonder for folks at home, we have an election in 13 months. Russia will try to interfere.

Can Americans have confidence in this election if their sitting president shows no interest in --

CLAPPER: Well --

SCIUTTO: Protecting or prioritizing, protecting that election?

CLAPPER: First of all, it won't be just Russia because I think --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

[09:25:00]

CLAPPER: Others will have gone -- have gone to school and seen the success of the Russian interference in 2016. And so others with different axes to grind -- notably Iran or North Korea or in China as examples are also going to participate. I am sure that a lot has been done to enhance election -- the security of our election apparatus in preparation for 2020.

I think, you know, the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and National Security agency and other have done this as well as the states. But you have to remember that our election process and the apparatus that supports it is very decentralized among 50 states and local entities. So, I think at that level, probably progress towards securing the voter apparatus and election apparatus is probably uneven, at best.

But what's missing is the galvanizing effect of the president championing election security in the minds of the American people and the American electorate. And that's just been a big void.

SCIUTTO: Yes, well, folks at home care about it, they should call their congressman or woman. James Clapper; Director Clapper, thanks very much.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Jim.

HARLOW: Well said. All right, major development in the release. Turkey's president just saying moments ago the offensive against Kurdish forces in Syria is now officially under way. We're live on the Syrian border, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:30:00]